@diarm, good game mate. I sense some took the “you want it more” in the wrong way as some form of backhanded compliment. Nothing furthest from the truth: for a Uruguayan to admit their rival wants it more is the most damning and gut-wrenching admission of defeat. You can lose alright, but not give up.
It was a fantastic game and you were superb (minus the late bollocks about how I’d go around PMing people for votes). I chuckled at the hard Italian cheese and how you shamelessly managed to confuse the shit out of everyone for two pages banging on about how you had Franco Baresi, then Giuseppe Bergomi, and then it turned out you had neither but fecking Beppe Baresi instead. Same with the many incarnations of Bernd Schuster all simultaneously being on the pitch.
I’m fine with that, I’ve carried on like that before and had great fun doing it but, as you see in this game, eventually people want to make it catch up with you as some sort of righteous comeuppance. For the record, it was as ludicrous to call Nordahl a poor man’s Vieri as it was for
@Gio to call him Vieri on steroids. The truth is bang in between: similar players, with similar traits and equally stunning records at their peak, which would be deployed in the same way. There’s nothing in it to the point if you had Schiaffino you’d play Nordahl and if you had Baggio or Del Piero you’d play Vieri. If the partner can’t settle it, the only discernible difference as far as I can tell is that Vieri is left-footed.
The thing is, there’s a before and after winning a draft. I probably deserve to have made a bit of a reputation in my first few drafts. Then you win one and realise life goes on and nobody really cares (obvious and self-evident as it sounds) so you try go back to enjoying them but by then you have to play to character and people won’t let you not do it so I kept picking up fights here and there with
@Fergus' son on first, then
@Theon, and the truth is more often than not we actually agree on stuff. I’m a bit fed up with it all.
As said, you wanted it more (be careful not to want it too much going forward) and certainly deserved it on the back of the manager’s performance, if not the team that got on the pitch.
). As like you've (and EAP/Balu here) said before in that game, a simple tag would have sufficed in bringing the later clarifications to their attention and a PM wasn't necessary at all. It pressurises managers/voters and whilst it didn't matter for our game, shouldn't be allowed, under any scenario, in the future.
